shimrod

They won't pay the rate for proven talent and they don't seem comfortable trading prospects. As a plan C this doesn't look bad. Sign all the damaged goods and hope that 1 or 2 pan out. We may still have a shot at contending for the central division title. This plan also maintains the organization's premier goal, "financial flexibility". We've learned this vaunted flexibility is far more likely to be diverted to the owner's bank accounts than used to add talent and wins, but that's the way ownership rolls. I expect they're still trying to recoup the small portion of the stadium that wasn't bankrolled by the taxpayers.

We entered the off-season anticipating the FO making moves to support a deep playoff run. Now we're supposed to be happy the Twins are still in contention for the division? Congratulations. I believe you've just set a new land-speed record for goalposts.

"What disappoints me is the idea that we were told the Twins will aggressively pursue impact pitching, and be aggressive with the payroll, when in reality it seemingly was blown smoke" I wouldn't call it blowing smoke. Speaking for myself, I'm aggressively pursuing the acquisition of a 2019 Range Rover as soon as I find someone who will sell it to me for less than 20K. That's not blowing smoke. Seriously, 2019 Range Rover for 20K I'll pay you straight cash. I'm in this to win.

"The consternation over the lack of free agent signings seems to be bigger than when we got swept in the first round." Maybe because it looks like we plan to run out the same team that got swept, minus several occasional contributors and a whole lot of salary. I'm beginning to think the front office signed on expecting to execute the complete tear down/rebuild only to be thwarted by on-field success. Every free agent they've signed has been added with the intention they'd build value and trade for prospects. That's not a bad strategy but it's hard to execute when the team insists on winning enough to keep the post-season in play. Perhaps this will be the year the FO gets to finally gut the team of veterans and acquire the minor league talent that will eventually lead the organization back to the promised land.

"The answer is money, right?" I expect that is so. We're saving up for the big free agent investment that, when all is said and done, we won't make. Not that management didn't try to spend that money; they just couldn't find anyone to take it. Look on the bright side, though. Money unspent at the end of the season goes into the owners pockets, never to be seen again by the team or fans. That will provide fodder for another long offseason of fan vs pocket protector commentary on these boards.

"Can we get rid of this perceived reputation?" That reputation didn't come from nowhere, it was earned. And when I say rookies and castoffs I'm not referring to the 2019 team. The Twins spent big on Mauer and what did they put around him? Little to nothing, certainly nothing in free agency. What assurance does a top free agent have that the owners won't revert to form? My point is that adding long-term assets via trade first may make it easier to convince potential free agents that the team is committed to winning, not simply being competitive enough to maintain ticket sales.

I expect the Twins reputation as cheapskates will scare off free agent pitchers, even if offered a premium salary. Players will want to play for a good team - I can't imagine anyone wants to sign a big dollar contract and find it offset by filling the roster with rookies and cast-offs. If you're going to convince a top free agent to come to MN I think you need to start by trading for premium talent. Bump Berrios back to number 3 by trade and you might have a chance to bump him back to number 4 via free agency. Yes, it's expensive in both prospects and dollars, but I think it's the only way we sign a top free agent pitcher. My personal expectation is that the Twins are "in on" everyone, fail to sign a difference maker, and next year's rotation is no better than the crew that got blown out this fall.

"He was pitched 6 "Balls..." I agree Eddie swings at too many pitches off the plate, but to be fair the home plate umpire didn't seem to much care where the pitches were thrown. His strike zone could be charitably described as erratic.

Sam Dyson is a grown ass man who I'm sure is very capable of jumping on a plane and pitching the same day... It's my understanding our players prepare for the games by studying their opponents...tendencies, weaknesses, strengths... and pro ball requires more work than just showing up and throwing. Unless Dyson spent his plane ride watching video and studying Miami batters, he wasn't prepared and shouldn't have been playing. Or maybe all that talk about analytics and film study is BS and the players actually spend their pre-game playing cards and getting pedicures. In that case, grown-ass man just had a bad day.

Correlation is not causation. Your post says a whole lot about you and virtually nothing about Kyle Gibson. How does noting the pitcher didn't follow his normal routine and then pitched poorly reflect on the commenter? Perhaps you interpreted the statement as a dig at religion but I didn't read it that way. Not that Gibson cost us the game. The bats and the bullpen deserve more opprobrium.

I think the eye test belies the numbers. He just looks baffled on so many pitches. Every time he comes to the plate it's high hopes balanced against low expectations.

'

Baldelli is the biggest problem to date. No experience and it shows. We're going to waste another season getting the manager up to speed. In the long run he may work out but in the short run he's killing us.

Once again, why wasn't Tortuga batting for Kepler yesterday?

Kepler had no business batting there. He may have hit lefties better than righties last year but it's important to remember he didn't hit either particularly well. The team needed a productive at bat in that situation.

"He must have really not liked something about Minnesota." Perhaps he likes to win.

"If he's not willing to characterize the year as rebuilding, but his sights aren't on winning... then, uh, what?" Then, business as normal with Twins management. The aim is to be "competitive" enough to produce decent ticket sales while banking the profits. They may set winning the division as a goal, provided the rest of the division is taking a few years off.

What's more likely to elevate their games...forcing them to step up and carry a mediocre roster or surrounding them with talent that allows them to relax and play? That's the question. There's money available to bolster the lineup. Do it.

Deadline trade fodder. Indicates that team management does not expect to win. How do you keep that expectation from filtering down to the players? I'm pretty sure you can't. I don't think you can build a winner without trying to, you know, win.

Moves like this are signs that management is not trying to win or contend; they're setting up to sell, again, at the deadline. I also won't be surprised to see it backfire, again. Performance and winning are contagious. Hitters improve when their teammates are hitting well. Good defense leads to good defense. Perhaps the only thing holding back our young players is the lack of good players next to them on the bench and in the lineup. At some point it will be time to go sign the high-performing free agent who will instill confidence in the younger players. I'd have thought this was the year but we're again sifting through the dumpster for players we can hope to flip for marginal gains in organizational talent. Waiting for the young players to lift themselves by their bootstraps and collectively form a contending team before you add talent is foolish. You've got tot prime the pump.

I've read on this site, on multiple occasions, that the Twins ownership/management (one or the other or both) cap expenditures at some percentage of revenue and excess profit is not carried over to next years budget. Correct me I'm wrong, but if true... Setting a target budget based on percentage of revenue is good business. It's the refusal to use the money saved by coming under budget I find infuriating. It's an arbitrary rule that handicaps the team's ability to compete. Normal people don't budget that way. I have no problem financing an expensive vacation next year by staying home this year, or driving an old vehicle a couple extra years in order get a better ride when I finally replace it. I think the fans would be fine with a couple seasons on the low end of the salary range to finance a Machado signing. That, in my opinion, drives all the anger over the Twins budget. It's a one way ratchet that can come in millions low season after season but will never go 1 dollar higher. Given the refusal to carry over money year to year and the taxpayer funding of Target field the Twins, in my opinion, have a moral obligation to spend up to their self-imposed maximum each year. If it costs them an extra $20,000,000 to win an additional home game at least they gave their best shot at entertaining the fans who funded the stadium. And who knows, maybe that extra win puts the team in the playoffs. The argument that there's no use spending the money because the team is not in position to contend is BS. If the ownership doesn't see it that way they can refund the tax money and set the budget as low as they want. Once you take the citizens cash you have an obligation to put the best team you can afford on the field. Forfeiting the season while you pocket an extra 10 or 20 million is no longer an option. My point is, fiscal prudence only makes sense in the long term. If saving money this year does nothing to improve next years team it's just ownership screwing the fans, again.

Turned it off at 8 - 0. Apparently that was a good decision.

(possibly even routine enough to be an out at first as well for a solid 3B). I'll accept that my recollection of that play favored Adrianza more than he deserved. I will not accept that he (or anyone else) could have made a play on the runner AND made the play at first. He's being criticized for throwing to first rather than making a play on the baserunner. If he can't get the ball to first in time as his first play there certainly wasn't time to do both.

I'm not sure Adrianza makes the play at third. The runner is coming hard and Adrianza has to change direction and come back to the bag or runner. If he's behind the basepath it's another story but he was out in front with the runner behind him. That was not an automatic out.

Stephen Gonsalves allowed nine earned runs on nine hits, both the highest totals of his pro career.... Despite the fine work in his previous six turns, he'd handed out a troubling 21 free passes in 33 frames with 61% strikes. Back when Gonsalves was experiencing the control issues and occasional high-contact games I wondered if that was indicative of focusing on a particular pitch. Were the staff running him out there with instructions to, say, throw 50% change-ups regardless of result? From a developmental standpoint I could see the benefit of forcing a pitcher to use a weaker pitch to build comfort in game situations. I would think by AAA the pitchers should have command of their repertoire but perhaps not. If the issue was forcing development it seems to have worked.